Wentworth voters beware religious freedom con

October 11, 2018 — 12.05am

On the eve of a byelection in Wentworth, the seat which returned the third highest "yes" vote of 80.8 per cent in the same sex marriage vote, the Coalition may not like voters to know that it has the rights of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Australians under consideration.

The same sex marriage vote last year showed strong support for LGBT rights.Credit:AP

Attorney-General Christian Porter has disingenuously criticised the Herald's report. He said Section 38 of the Federal Sex Discrimination Act already allows same sex schools to discriminate and this "regime" will not change.

Until the report is formally released the detail won't be clear but there are many ways to undermine LGBTI rights in religious schools and elsewhere without touching Section 38.

Advertisement

For instance, several religious groups have been calling for change to Section 10(3) which says that where state and federal laws differ, state laws effectively take precedence. If states lose the ability to legislate for themselves, LGBTI people in Tasmania and Queensland will lose significant protection under their own act and change will be impossible elsewhere.

Tasmania currently offers the complete protection from discrimination to LGBTI people in religious schools while Queensland protects students from discrimination and has a "don't-ask-don't-tell" regime to make it harder to sack LGBTI teachers.

NSW's antiquated act unfortunately has some of the worst protection for LGBTI people in religious schools, worse even than current federal law. NSW should be following the examples in those other states.

The law should make no concessions to the medieval slur that LGBTI people pose a threat to children. Discrimination that punishes LGBTI children or children of LGBTI parents is particularly repugnant.

If the federal law is changed it should be to offer LGBTI people complete protection in religious schools which receive Federal funds. And it should confirm protection for LGBTI people and same sex marriage from discrimination in other areas such as the provision of services by groups with religious affiliations.

The results of the same sex marriage vote confirmed the overwhelming support for tolerance in the Australian community. Religious groups should reflect on what that means for them.

It would be a betrayal to the voters of Wentworth if they discovered they had not been told of major changes which were part of the Coalition's platform for the next Federal election.

This would not be the first time a Coalition government has pandered to anti-LGBTI sentiment. The Howard government before the 2004 election entrenched the discriminatory definition of marriage that was only reversed by the painful process of the same-sex postal vote last year.

The federal government should formally release the Ruddock review and explain any changes it is planning to the Sex Discrimination Act. The Herald looks forward to reporting the news and explaining any such proposal. Prime Minister Scott Morrison should not be playing the issue on both sides of the fence ahead of such a crucial byelection.